While the bill is primarily supported by Democrats, Republican Sen. Kevin Priola is among the sponsors. Priola is a moderate who represents a swing district in Adams County, where he works in commercial real estate.
For him the issue couldn’t hit closer to home — his son started vaping as a teen and struggled to stop.
“It was obvious he was addicted to it. He would say he could give it up, but he couldn’t,” Priola told CPR in 2020, when his son was 17.
The Priolas decided as a family to speak out about their struggles, hoping to educate people about the rise and dangers of teen vaping.
The bill has been moving slowly through the legislature, where Democrats hold the majority.
It was introduced very early — just two days after the session began back in January. But now months later, it is held up in the committee process, and has to get to a floor vote.
Intense pressure from both sides has made it the third most lobbied bill this session, according to an analysis by the Colorado Sun: 141 lobbyists representing 87 clients.
Hearings in a pair of House committees spotlighted a furious debate that touched on a sprawling set of issues involving public health and retailers’ revenue, addiction and cessation, personal choice and government regulation.
Lawmakers heard hours and hours of testimony. On one side, it was exasperated moms and educators, doctors and public health folks. On the other, worried adults who say vaping products helped them quit, plus vape shop owners and employees, saying these products made up a healthy share of their revenues.
A spokeswoman for the Smoker Friendly chain said they’d lose 30 percent of their business. They argue the measure would hurt Colorado businesses while driving — literally — consumers over the border to stores in Wyoming. They also warn those same purchasers will just fuel a black market for the product in Colorado.
Jason Casados from Vapor Source, a company in Pueblo, told lawmakers he supports efforts to keep flavored tobacco out of the hands of minors, but a ban would put him out of business.
“I’ve been in this industry for 13 years. I employ over 35 full-time employees. Ninety-eight percent of our products that we sell and manufacture are flavored nicotine products,” he said.
The bill also faces some resistance from some Democrats, like Rep. Chris Kennedy, who doesn’t want to see an across-the-board ban. He introduced an amendment that would have allowed certain stores, like age-restricted vape shops, to keep selling the products.
“I think that what I was hoping to do with my amendment and committee was to drive a conversation about trying to achieve the goal of reducing youth access without impairing adult access,” he said. “There are reasonable differences of opinion. The sponsors feel pretty strongly that you can’t do both at the same time. And, I wanted to explore the possibility that maybe we could.”
His amendment was later stripped out.
For bill supporters though, their biggest hurdle may be just one man: Gov. Jared Polis
One sponsor acknowledged it’s not Polis’ favorite bill, which isn’t surprising. The Democratic governor is known for having a libertarian streak and this bill would tell adults they can’t make the decision to use a product they might want to use.
In an interview this week on Colorado Matters, the governor reiterated that he’d rather see these policies happen at the city and county level.
“I support local control on a wide variety of issues and exactly what gets sold with marijuana or nicotine or alcohol is a local decision. I’m against statewide prohibition of alcohol or marijuana or tobacco, but if a community doesn’t want to have a dispensary or doesn’t want to have vape, that is completely their prerogative,” he said.
The paradox behind a key Polis priority
For Polis, a statewide ban on flavored nicotine products wouldn’t just violate his political principals — it could also endanger one of his top policy priorities. He successfully pushed a ballot measure two years ago to raise the tax on tobacco and vape products to bring in money for free universal preschool.
If the flavored tobacco ban were to pass, that would drain millions of dollars from the program. An initial fiscal analysis predicted losses of nearly $40 million in yearly tax revenues if the ban is enacted, with $25 million of that being borne by the preschool program. The preschool program has a total yearly budget of $167 million.
However, that impact could be lessened if it turns out users simply switch to unflavored products instead of quitting, a later analysis said.
The issue has some at the Capitol voicing concerns about using so-called sin taxes to support key public services.
“I would love to have the discussion about just how outrageously ridiculous that it is to fund things with sin taxes,” said Democratic Rep Marc Snyder of El Paso County, during a hearing for the bill. “It’s ridiculous that we don’t recognize that we’re trying to create a social policy to get people off of these products, and yet we’re funding essential services with the high taxes we levy on those.”
Polis recently told CPR he has no qualms about tying his preschool program to tobacco tax revenues, arguing that education is a relevant area to fund. He also noted the increased taxes support smoking cessation programs as well.
With Polis opposed, high-powered lobbying on both sides, and the end of the legislative session rapidly approaching, the bill’s future this year looks increasingly cloudy.
Credit: Source link